Motion Censors

There was a wave of it when the 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire' film came out and now it's clear to me that censorship is trying to grab the media spotlight once again. Recent proposals to ban the upcoming film 'Brokeback Mountain' and Sydney Festival act 'The Tiger Lillies' has finally brought me out in protest of arts censorship. I haven't seen either of the shows as neither are out yet but have heard plenty about both, so I won't go into specific details but rather examine some of the issues that have been raised in the prelude to their release.

For the record, 'Brokeback Mountain' is a film about two cowboys falling in love despite the homophobia present in their environs. The Sydney Festival program summarises 'The Tiger Lillies' using descriptions such as " seamy, satisfying mixtures of opera, gypsy song and Left Bank Paris, their songs describe pimps, prostitutes, drug addicts and other unsavoury characters in lurid detail" and finishes with "wicked fun and fiendish depravity!"

The hoo-ha over 'Brokeback Mountain' is well-documented in the USA when the US Conference of Catholic Bishops issued it an "O" rating for morally offensive and a handful of cinemas declined to screen it. Apparently distributors UIP won't even try Malaysia, which has previously rejected 'Schindler's List', 'The Prince of Egypt' and 'Zoolander' for various, mostly religious, reasons. In Australia, the religious right, the most vocal being President of the Christian Democratic Party Reverend Fred Nile who decided to protest over the film's content and urged cinemas not to screen it here, implying that it was 'anti-family'. "I'll be making contact with similar pro-family groups to see whether there should be some action taken against it" he said to Daniel Hoare on PM (ABC Radio National). In the same segment, Gabrielle Walsh from the Australian Family Association said "they really need to make sure that people under 18 or families don't think it's just your standard western, and go in to see it."

The hypocrisy of these statements against the film is evident when you consider incidents such as paedophilia in the church and the lack of protest over violent films such as slasher flick 'Hostel' (which reached #1 in the US). It implies that while religious groups seem to have gotten over the possibility that violence in the media has no influence, gay flicks might encourage one into queerdom. Walsh's comment seems to imply that people see cowboy hats and want to see a film, although the nature of the movie is clearly evident on posters, trailers, cinema websites and other media. My two cents is that the film is probably more real than any other cowboy flick you've ever seen. I mean, forbidden love between two men in a conservative society seems more likely than shoot 'em ups at high noon. Besides, the two must face the consequences of their relationship. Would the church rather celebrate the facade marriage between Heath Ledger's character and Michelle Williams' character or the real love between the men? It seems the former, and in that decision you can already start to see what it wrong with some religious groups today.

In today's Daily Telegraph, Nile said of 'The Tiger Lillies', "I think it's serious that the Sydney Festival would select something like that. They try to present it as family entertainment this holiday season and it certainly doesn't fit that theme. It's sad it has been put in the Opera House, our icon. It denigrates the Opera House."

First of all Reverend, the Sydney Festival certainly did NOT "try to present it as family entertainment". Note to Nile; just because it is the school holidays doesn't mean that everything is for children. I wanted to go to 'The Tiger Lillies' but got turned off by the start time of 10:30pm. If that is show time for children then you should turn your attention to the more accessible TV shows that are shown at that time before raising a ruckus about an Opera House Studio cabaret act running for four nights. The Sydney Festival aims to present a broad spectrum of arts, from the spoken word of Saul Williams to the large scale Domain events. This means some of the program is specifically for children, some shows are suitable for all ages and some are specifically for adults. 'The Tiger Lillies' falls into the latter category.

At the volunteer briefing, director Fergus Linehan acknowledged the debauched nature of the show and outlined its previous reception elsewhere in Australia (some people walked out of Adelaide and Melbourne shows and demanded their money back) but justified his decision in bringing them to the Sydney Festival by saying that he thought Sydney audiences more receptive to this type of art and that he found it important for us to have access to this type of act. So your friendly Sydney Festival info booth volunteer is unlikely to recommend 'The Tiger Lillies' for those with a conservative disposition.

Secondly, Reverend, at what point can one lay claim to the Opera House and its program? Do you want three hours of unannounced betrayal, infidelity and suicide or an hour of publicised depravity? When I thought about going to see 'The Tiger Lillies' I knew exactly what I would be getting - it said so in the program and I doubt it has been misrepresented. However, I rue the day I went to see 'Madama Butterfly' on the basis of it being a 'classic'. It was boring and overhyped and I thought I was going to get something more moving and worthwhile than what eventuated. Denigration indeed. But, no protests as yet to this year's Opera House staging of betrayal, infidelity and suicide in 'Madama Butterfly'. I even hear it'll be the highlight of Opera in the Domain on the 28th, a free concert accessible to CHILDREN.

At the end of all this posturing is the question; at what point can religion interfere with the lifestyle of the non-religious? Or being more inclusive of the AFA, at what point can groups of people who want to protect the ignorant interfere with the decisions of the informed consumer? Surely if you agree with Nile's CDP and the AFA the easiest thing would be to make a decision with your wallet and not see the film or the show. But to stop these art pieces from even airing is not democracy. I am an educated, informed citizen of Australia and if a film or show is available for me to see and I want to see it, then what right does anyone have to stop me? As long as the nature of the entertainment has not been misrepresented, I don't see why groups like the CDP and the AFA shouldn't just let their members make their own informed decisions about what is and is not entertainment. The box office will have the last say.